GeForce 8400 SE vs ATI Radeon X800 PRO

Place in the ranking	1412	1404
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	0.25	0.25
Architecture	R400 (2004−2008)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	R423	G86S
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	1 May 2004 (20 years ago)	1 August 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	no data	16
Core clock speed	475 MHz	459 MHz
Number of transistors	160 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	130 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	48 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	5.700	3.672
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.02938 TFLOPS
ROPs	12	4
TMUs	12	8

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x Molex	None

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR3	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	128 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	450 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	6.4 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	9.0b (9_2)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.0
OpenGL	2.0	3.3
OpenCL	N/A	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	-	1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI X800 PRO 0.17

8400 SE 0.18
+5.9%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

ATI X800 PRO 64

8400 SE 68
+6.3%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.17	0.18
Recency	1 May 2004	1 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	128 MB
Chip lithography	130 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	48 Watt	50 Watt

ATI X800 PRO has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 4.2% lower power consumption.

8400 SE, on the other hand, has a 5.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon X800 PRO and GeForce 8400 SE.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.